ROBERT STANLEY COOPER
v.
STATE OF FLORIDA
AI-generated. These summaries, headnotes, and key points are machine-generated and may contain errors or omissions. Always verify against the full opinion text below. Not legal advice.
Investigative costs cannot be assessed without a request for same, and courts must identify specific conditions violated when revoking probation.
[1] Investigative costs may not be assessed against a criminal defendant without an express request for such costs.
[2] A court's order revoking probation must specifically identify the condition or conditions the probationer violated to provide adequate notice and a sufficient basis for r…
Previewing 2 of 2 headnotes on this case. FLexlaw’s editorially structured points of law — every proposition, pinpointed — are reserved for members.
Join FLexlaw to unlock all legal intelligence“investigative costs of $50 payable to the Daytona Beach Shores Police Department were assessed against Appellant in three of the four cases, despite the fact that there was apparently no request for same”
Statement of the first error requiring reversal and remand.
Cooper pled open to the court in four criminal cases before the County Court for Volusia County. The trial court imposed investigative costs of $50 in…
The full statement of facts, procedural history, and disposition for this case are member content.
Join FLexlaw to unlock all legal intelligence© FLexlaw, Inc. — AI-generated enrichments are proprietary. All rights reserved.
Explore caselaw by topic → Browse Investigative Costs cases and more on FLexlaw
PER CURIAM.
We affirm this Anders1 appeal, except regarding two matters, as to four cases in which Appellant pled open to the court. First, investigative costs of $50 payable to the Daytona Beach Shores Police Department were assessed against Appellant in three of the four cases, despite the fact that there was apparently no request for same.2 See Richards v. State, 288 So. 3d 574, 576 (Fla. 2020). We reverse and remand for entry of amended orders that do not include investigative costs. Second, as to Case No. 2022-304672-MM, the court failed to identify what conditions Appellant had violated that led to revocation of probation. See Hollis v. State, 277 So. 3d 1099 (Fla. 5th DCA 2019) (citing Patt v. State, 876 So. 2d 1278, 1278 (Fla. 5th DCA 2004)). We reverse and remand for entry of an amended order identifying the condition(s) the court found Appellant violated in that case. We affirm as to all other matters.
AFFIRMED IN PART, REVERSED IN PART, REMANDED WITH INSTRUCTIONS.
LAMBERT, C.J., EDWARDS and PRATT, JJ., concur.
Cases With Similar Vibessemantic neighbors from the corpus
Citator
Cited By
-
Cooper v. State (Fla. 5th DCA 2023)…e and remand for entry of amended orders that do not include investigative costs. Second, as to Case No. 2022- 304672-MM, the court failed to identify what conditions Appellant had violated that led to revocation of probation. See Hollis v. State, 277 So. 3d 1099 (Fla. 5th DCA 2019) (citing Patt v. State, 876 So. 2d 1278, 1278 (Fla. 5th DCA 2004)). We reverse and remand for entry of an amended order identifying the condition(s) the court found Appellant violated in that case. We affirm as to all other matte…
Authorities Cited
- Anders v. California, 386 U.S. 738 (U.S. 1967)
- Smith v. State (Fla. 4th DCA 2026)
- Patt v. State, 876 So. 2d 1278 (Fla. 5th DCA 2004)
- Cooper v. State (Fla. 5th DCA 2023)